Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

CI: APIv2 tests: add rootless #14551

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 14, 2022
Merged

CI: APIv2 tests: add rootless #14551

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 14, 2022

Conversation

edsantiago
Copy link
Member

This would've caught a regression that #14549 had to fix.
Let's try to prevent the next regression.

Signed-off-by: Ed Santiago [email protected]

None

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 9, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: edsantiago

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jun 9, 2022
@edsantiago
Copy link
Member Author

@Luap99 two of the failures are in this test which you added this morning in #14549:

podman/test/apiv2/20-containers.at

Line 482 in 874ca42

.HostsPath=""

Log:

         not ok 501 [20-containers] GET libpod/containers/sha/json : .HostsPath
         #  expected: 
         #    actual: /run/user/24432/containers/overlay-containers/sha/userdata/hosts

Is this a bug in the test, or a bug in the code? I.e., should .HostsPath be empty even when rootless?

@edsantiago edsantiago force-pushed the apiv2_tests_rootless branch from 9d3b036 to 6a07abd Compare June 9, 2022 22:01
@Luap99
Copy link
Member

Luap99 commented Jun 10, 2022

Is this a bug in the test, or a bug in the code? I.e., should .HostsPath be empty even when rootless?

It must always be empty. It should not depend on root/rootless. I have to double check why it is failing but I definitely tested it rootless on my PR and it worked there.

@edsantiago
Copy link
Member Author

Please don't spend any time on it. I added some debug instrumentation which shows that there's a problem restarting the server. I will investigate next week.

@edsantiago edsantiago force-pushed the apiv2_tests_rootless branch 2 times, most recently from 87cdb1a to 8fe6191 Compare June 13, 2022 16:07
edsantiago
edsantiago commented Jun 13, 2022
View reviewed changes
test/apiv2/test-apiv2 Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@edsantiago
CI: APIv2 tests: add rootless
455f4c7 
This would've caught a regression that containers#14549 had to fix.
Let's try to prevent the next regression.

This requires some hackery to get namespaces initialized
before the service is started; otherwise the service itself
initializes namespaces, which basically ends up with a
server process that runs forever.

Also: in stop_service(), reset service_pid, because that's
the correct thing to do.

Also: add some debug statements to try to figure out a
CI failure. (And leave them in place, because they might
be useful for future problems).

Signed-off-by: Ed Santiago <[email protected]>
@edsantiago edsantiago force-pushed the apiv2_tests_rootless branch from 8fe6191 to 455f4c7 Compare June 14, 2022 15:20
@rhatdan
Copy link
Member

rhatdan commented Jun 14, 2022

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 14, 2022
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot merged commit 1cf3e4c into containers:main Jun 14, 2022
@edsantiago edsantiago deleted the apiv2_tests_rootless branch June 14, 2022 17:32
@github-actions github-actions bot added the locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. label Sep 21, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 21, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Reviewers

@Luap99 Luap99 Luap99 left review comments

Assignees

@rhatdan rhatdan

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. release-note-none
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@edsantiago @Luap99 @rhatdan